Now, "faith" in the theistic sense is directed towards an allegedly existing object outside onself. Personally, I am inclined to think that the desire to imagine our inner processes and states as being distinct, separate entities outside ourselves is strange, naive, and at the same time unparsimonous and unnecessarily complicated. However, I suspect that for some people it is helpful.
There must be a reason why this is a common technique in literature, dramas, metaphores, fables, poetry - and even in our dreams. If I read the bible as making use of this technique (with god, satan, angels, heaven, hell etc. being our inner states and processes explained as external entities), it certainly and immediately starts making a lot of sense.
If, as I tend to think, the function of "god" is being the spaceholder for their hopes, faith, confidence, then keeping it undefined or merely defined ex negativo is very useful. God is a. outside (myself), and b. beyond (beyond time, space, knowledge, comprehension, logic, younameit). This, of course, does not a proper definition make, but it serves its purpose perfectly: even in cases where I can´t - not even in retrospect and in the light of further experience - attach positive meaning to an experience there is still the faith that there is a beyond-meaning (and, being ascribed to a "higher" entity, even a greater, better, "objective" meaning) that will be intelligible to me once I will have entered this beyond-realm.
Of the two versions "faith in my faith" and "faith in god" (both of which do not operate with proper definitions) I think the latter is more powerful, in that it offers additional options.
Does it work for me? No.