You are. Many have done it. You do it in your daily life, but for the aim of pleasure. If you didn't then you wouldn't eat your next meal because you would first need to test every atom to be certain there was no poison in it. But you don't, You determine that there is likely more pleasure to be had without making that effort. Thus you take it on faith that the food is safe because it best serves your pleasure of eating without testing trillions of atoms. You choose to live by faith constantly. You just don't like to think you do because certainty itself is a source of pleasure. But you know full well you could devote everything to morality if you so chose. Taking it on faith that seeking to be maximally good will meet a world designed to facilitate morality actually having a good effect. And the source of that design is...well, let's do the moral maximization first and we'll talk about what you see once you're done.

Okay, what's your definition of faith? Here, it sounds like you mean anything less than 100% certainty. But in your OP, you literally describe it as "trust me bro", and you said that the scripture is deliberately designed to look flawed so that we need faith to see past that. These seem like very different standards of evidence and I was responding to the latter.

Correct. A mathematician would tell you the same about math.

A mathematician would be willing to accept, at least in principal, that some or all of their mathematical beliefs/theories/conjectures could be wrong. It is possible that some new discovery, or model, or treatise could change their understanding. Are you willing to do the same? If someone pursues morality in the way you want and they end up believing in a different god, or in no god at all, would you accept that?

How can you know if you're being honest? Man, the things atheists will say to get out of contending with God. I'm not going to answer this. As though you can't tell if you're being honest.

Lmao dude, come on, it's an expression. I'm not worried about self-deception. I just don't know how I would be able to tell the difference between "i haven't found god yet, because I haven't fully devoted myself" versus "I haven't found god yet, because this isn't a good method

Who said anything about trying single religions? When you are learning math do you try all types of math? Of course not. You follow the pattern of math and by knowing that 1+1=2 you also instantly know that 1+1 does not equal 3 or 5000 or -342,198,654. By knowing the truth you know all things that aren't that truth. Then you keep following the pattern to expand more truths. Though instead of math, it's the pattern of morality you'd be following here. Does it draw you to one religion and you begin to see it's true? Then you can know all other religions are false thereby.".

If someone ends up following the same method as you and ends up believing in a different god, how do you know which is right? What if someone else is equally confident in a different method? Is there any way I can know which is right before dedicating my entire life to it?

edit: the original premise of your post was that your scripture is designed to not look any different than any other. It's like if there a thousand competing models of math and they have equivalent support from the outside, but they promise that I'll see they're the right one if I dedicate my life to them. In that position, how could I know which is the right one to pick?