I posted a reply to Part 2, wherein I explained my view (from a Christian perspective) as to the lack of incompatibility between the Simulation Hypothesis as you've defined it and orthodox Christian theology.
Here, however, I take exception (sort of) to your assessment that we could conceivably know if we are part of a simulation.
This is the same exception I take to Scott Adams' statements about 'The Simulation' (his personal take on the Simulation Hypothesis).
Both you and he are assuming a simulation that is limited or bounded by a creator having finite resources.
The Christian view of the Creator is that He is limitless, that His knowledge and power know no bounds. If this view is correct, then we would most likely never find any 'boundaries' to the simulation (unless He intentionally left them there for us to 'find').
Similarly, there would be no need (or requirement or 'benefit') to the creator for 'reusing code' (a recurring theme within Scott Adams' discussions of 'The Simulation').
So, in summary, although I agree with your notion that finding those boundaries probably represents the only way we could find evidence supporting the Simulation Hypothesis, this assertion only holds if the creator is limited in resources or has at least chosen to limit the resources available for the simulation itself.
A limitless simulation created by a limitless creator would not provide such telltale evidences.