Again, that's just a way of interpreting "the inexplicable".

"I do not know what caused this, therefore it must have been caused by 'God'."

But they don't, though, do they? Because you said yourself that "they are not stone solid proof". It's just a way of interpreting historical hazard in religious terms.

As for your second reason to believe in God... was the same divine being accountable for your family's hardship in the first place?

Also, isn't the reason your family ate eggs, bread and a pizza that night down to economic circumstance and a very kind pizzeria employee? Was God acting through said employee?

If it had suddenly started raining pizzas in your garden after you had prayed for God to feed you, then fair enough. But as is, I see nothing inexplicable or miraculous in the logic of events you've described.

The key question here is why do you account for these events with an interventionist interpretation? Regardless of what the event is, why should it be a creator, some unknown mysterious and morally good force?

I can understand the desperation of certain situations, and the immense relief one might feel when surviving such situations (be that an earthquake, a break-up or the biological need to consume food). I can relate to the real sense of 'gratitude' and 'thanks' in coming through these situations, though cannot understand why one must fill what one thinks is a gap in logic (due to scientific ignorance?) with 'GOD DID IT!'