How can or what makes a question also a fallacy?

I suppose it's circumstantial. But in the case of asking someone to prove or disprove the existence of god I think the biggest problem is beginning those questions with the presupposition that either can actually be done.

Im confused by what your saying. if i dont know something how can i ask a question about it, wouldnt i have to know about it to ask the question and refer to it at all?

I'm getting confused now too. Are you saying you already knew about the god of the gaps?

If language and logic is a system of symbols referring to something in reality, what am i referring to when i ask questions about god?

Well, language doesn't always refer to something in reality. Even metaphors and symbolism are examples of this. You ever read up on semiotics? It's pretty fascinating.

If there is no objective truth then what is subjective truth the subject of?

I don't know. There's a lot of sides to ontological arguments. I think Sartre, Beauvoir, or Foucault would say something like we see ourselves as the subject and to cause the changes we want we have to treat the other as an object. Heidegger would say the entire way of thinking about our experience through the lens of subjective/objective is flawed and that being doesn't happen in isolation.