Bible contradictions?

[Undeceived]

You keep claiming these incredulous things chip, yet never have any evidence to back them up. It's all well and good saying that "no it happened on this day" or what have you, but actually provide some EVIDENCE that what you're saying is true.

Neither does anyone have evidence for the contradiction view. Both sides have their respective backers' explanations. We're both using the same Bible. You interpret it one way. Christians, who know the Bible and its cultural period front to back, interpret it another. Rather than digging for a handful of petty inconsistencies to say "Aha! This proves it was made up," take a look from the other angle. Think hypothetically to yourself, "If God exists, can this make sense?" You'll find that it can.

Anyway, the contradictions presented by everyone so far are in the trimmed down, edited bible. There's a whole cartload of stuff that was cut out early on ( basically anything portaying Jesus as being even slightly human, and anything in favour of women), like the gospels of Thomas and Mary Magdalen.

It's a good thing some writings were cut out. Either they were written by uninspired non-witnesses, they could not have been proven to be written by their namesakes, or they were written later than all the other books. The Book of Mary has been proved not to be authentic and written between the 3rd and 5th centuries. The Gospel of Thomas is from the 2nd to 3rd centuries. It falsely attributes some of Paul's sayings to Jesus and has quotations inconsistent with all the other Gospels.
GoT 114:
[Simon Peter said to them, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."]

As you can see, this is anti-women and doesn't fit with Peter, whose wife was a believer, or Jesus, who openly talked with women even when it was improper culturally. The NT canon was constructed of the books early churches were already using. Imagine how warped the Bible would be today if it accepted every stray book out there.

The bible as is can't even get the nativity story right, it's told 4 different ways in 4 different gospels.

The nativity story is only in Matthew and Luke, and I don't see how they might contradict. Different parts are told, but they fit and add on one another. If the exact same events were told the exact same way you'd say they were copied. Luckily, that's not the case.