'God' didn't write the story, a man did, hence the story involves it being okay to gang rape some guys daughters as you put it.
I'm absolutely fine with saying the Bible is not the inspired word actually. I'm not sure why you wouldn't think I am. I'm a bit surprised you are...
You really shouldn't talk about stories you don't understand in the slightest. About the only thing god 'wrote' was the ten commandments, and even that story was
See - this is what Christians do when presented with the unpleasant bits of the Bible. All of a sudden "it's man's word." But find parts you agree with and it becomes "God's word" again. I don't know your personal theology. But to me it sounds like we partially agree. The Bible was written by man and is therefore no more important in many regards than anything else - except as an historic text. It proves nothing divine.
Its mind numbing that people like to try and tear religion apart with logic like you are, but you ignore the fact that parts you're picking on were tainted by man.
How do you know this? And how do you know other parts aren't? What justification do you use for cherry-picking parts you like from those you don't?