At first it seemed you rejected scriptures based on God's eternal punishment of those who reject Him. Then you stated you did not know or believe the Bible was true at all. So obviously you have to solve the first problem on determining the scriptures as faithful and true before you can commentary on its content. The way I see it, if you don't believe the report is authentic, then it matters not what you think about 'roasted goat.'
Logically, if you don't even believe in God's existence or don't except the Biblical God then 'roasted goat' to you is absurd.
I guess my next question would be is why do you reject the authenticity of scriptures? Do you have evidence to refute the authenticity?
Would you question the “authenticity” of a document whose major premise was: the cow jumped over the moon?
Is it reasonable to question the legitimacy of a document whose major premise is: God really, really loves you, and if you don’t believe it, He will allow/arrange for you to burn in hell forever?
Both of the premises are ridiculous.