Leauki, the big problem with lula (and many other religious people btw.) is that she states her beliefs as fact.
There are facts in religion and there are beliefs.
I am not religious. I am what is considered "traditional" or "conservative" in Judaism. I go to a Reform synagogue. But I do believe in G-d and certain things about Him.
It is an undeniable fact that the Jewish people exist and have a law called the Torah (first of the three books of the Hebrew Bible) and a holy book called the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible) that records Jewish history as seen by Jewish authorities at the time. It is a fact that Jewish law commands Jews to observe the Shabbat, to keep kosher (i.e. not eat pork etc.), and to love the country of Israel.
But it is faith or belief that those things are G-d's will. In truth they could just be laws made up by secular Jewish leaders.
That's one problem. I believe G-d inspired Jewish leaders to write the Torah and the Tanakh but I don't know that this is indeed so. I can live with that.
The other problem is that some religions, especially Christianity, claim universal truth for themselves. In Judaism it doesn't matter what other (non-Jewish) people believe. For all Judaism cares G-d might have sent other prophets to other people (some such are recorded in the Bible). I personally regard Zoroastrianism as true because it is mentioned in the Bible as such. For all I care G-d could also have sent a prophet named Muhammed to the Arabs. It doesn't matter to me whether He did with regards to my own faith.
And I can also accept that Christians have a Messiah named Jesus who was a Jew.
What I cannot accept is that my G-d has a literal "son" with a virgin. I don't care if other people believe it though.
But I have a problem with those same people telling me what my beliefs are, have to be, or that I have to accept their Messiah as mine (even though my beliefs are my Messiah are quite different from their beliefs about everybody's Messiah).
The point is that I can live with the fact that there are Hindus, Muslims, and Christians out there without worrying about them being "wrong". The son of G-d thing is a bit worrying (because they took my G-d for that). But maybe G-d wanted Indians to see Him in the form of Hindu gods or whatever. It doesn't matter to me. I find the history fascinating but it doesn't affect my beliefs.
And then there are the different Jewish tribes and their different versions of Jewish history.
The Jews (tribes of Juda, Benjamin, and Simeon) believe that the Temple is supposed to be in Jerusalem and that holy scripture consists of Torah (Instruction), Nevi'im (Prohets), and Ketuvim (Writings).
The Samaritans (tribes of Menasseh and Ephraim) believe that the Temple is supposed to be further north, in Samaria and that's where their Temple stood after the one kingdom split up. Their holy scripture is just the Torah with somewhat different text.
Ethiopian Jews (tribe of Dan) accept as holy the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) plus a few texts missing in the text non-Ethiopian Jews use.
It's not easy.
Plus the hole thing is written in ancient languages few Christians understand. So they often take the English translations as the literal word of G-d. Grand...
The Samaritan Torah is written in Samaritan Hebrew. The Tanakh is written in Hebrew and Aramaic. The Ethiopian Tanakh is written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Ge'ez (the liturgical language of Ethiopian Jews). I think it's utterly fascinating and the more I learn the more I find there is to learn. That's why I am suspicious of anyone who claims to have arrived at the truth. It seems to me that those people are still at the very early stages of learning scripture, in the early stages it still looks like it could all be understood.