1. Faith is belief in something without evidence that it is real.
2. There are quite literally an infinite number of things that could be claimed, such as:
2a. There are dragons living on the dark side of the moon.
2b. People with red hair have sold their soul to the devil.
2c. God is real and lives inside the planet Jupiter.
2d. Eating live crickets will cure cancer.
2e. The earth is flat.
2f. The moon is made of green cheese.
2g. Donald Trump is a genius.
2h. Mole people live under the earth.
2i. The Dalai Lama is a space alien.
2j. Electrons are actually tiny demons.
....etc.

Since you can go on naming ideas forever, there has to be a solid reason to believe one claim over another. If you pick just one crazy notion out of an infinite selection of possible crazy notions, what are the odds that your particular crazy notion is actually true? That brings us back to science. Science is how we decide which claims of faith might be worth believing in, and which should be doubted.

So which version of "god" do one choose to believe in? Most people do not choose. They believe in whatever version of god they were brought up to believe. So since you have so many people who believe so many contradictory versions of god, based on their ow personal faith, it follows that one's personal faith is a lousy way to decide what to believe and what not to believe. If it were otherwise, then the people with the strongest faith, for example, those willing to strap on suicide vests in the name of their faith, have the most likelihood of being correct. Do you believe that? Do people whose faith is stronger than yours have a better claim to their faith being true? Or is faith simply a psychological phenomenon that has no relation to what is or is not true?