> I can imagine inquisitive minds today might want to know more about how the God "hardware" works.

Again, this is a category error. God (in the Catholic/Christian theological tradition) is not, strictly speaking, an individual or a being. Not even the Supreme Being. God is the act of to be. What you mean when you refer to "God" and what theologians mean when they refer to "God" are two different things:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zMf_8hkCdc

> The world has turned out to be really amazing and strange.

Stranger than you thing. Expanding:

> Of every created entity, we may ask two questions: what is its nature, and does it actually exist? Answering the first question does not give us an answer to the second. Consider the question “What is ____?” [...] If, for example, we ask, “What is a human being?” we might reasonably reply, “A rational animal.” We need not add the phrase “that exists.” It does not improve or clarify our response to the request for a definition. We can grasp the “what-it-is” of an entity, in other words, without having to determine whether it exists.

[...]

> This distinction between essence and existence also applies to imaginary entities. If you ask me, “What are elves?” I will explain that they are rational children of Ilúvatar, but unlike human beings, they are immortal and exist as long as the world lasts. [Per Tolkien.]

[...]

> Commenting on the above passage from the Summa Theologiae, Bauerschmidt writes: “Existence is not a part of the definition of any created thing; even more, it cannot be derived from that definition, as the ability to laugh can be derived from the definition of human beings as rational animals, for the existence of a particular thing’s essence presupposes that the thing exist”

> But not so with the eternal Creator, who is perfect simplicity. If God is God—that is to say, the ultimate and final answer to the question “Why does anything exist rather than nothing?” (the burden of the Five Ways)—then he cannot suffer from essence/existence composition. God does not potentially exist; he necessarily exists. Deity is the mystery where the ontological buck finally stops. Here is perhaps Thomas’s most important contribution to Christian reflection upon divinity. The eternal Creator and first mover must exist in and of himself. He cannot derive existence from some other source; otherwise the question of “why” would continue ad infinitum. But not only must God exist, he is his existence: the whatness of God is identical to his act of existing (ipsum essendi).

* https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2016/05/25/god-simply-is-the-s...

> To answer your question, I imagine something may exist at one time, then not exist, but have put in motion the events to cause it to exist again.

And what caused the thing to come into existence in the first place? It did not exist, at all, at one point it time. It then did. Then it went away, but came back. I'm talking about the first nothing-to-something instantiation.

Further, when it does exist, why does it continue to exist?

When theologians say "God creates the world", they don't just mean in the past. Yes, you could say "God created the world" via the Big Bang, but they also mean in the here-and-now. Just as Yo-Yo Ma created recordings of Bach's Cello Suites (that will continue to exist after he dies), he also creates the sound of the Cello Suites during a concert: and the music stops when he stops moving the bow.

The first ("created") sense is what is called accidentally ordered creation, while the latter ("creates") is called essentially ordered creation:

* http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2014/09/first-way-part-ii-two-le...