The context is a married wife who commits fornication (obviously with someone other than the husband) relieves the husband of causing the charge of adultery…
No, the adultery comes after the divorce. Nor can the porneia/fornication relieve the husband from causing her to commit adultery. Look again, anyone who marries her after the divorce commits adultery.
And then you claimed the charge of fornication was an act before marriage…
No, you completely misunderstand. The fornication is not an act before the marriage but rather an impediment that invalidates it. It is the union itself that is porneia/fornication. This is why with such a divorce there is no adultery if she marries. Any other reading makes a mockery of what Jesus says just before when he rejects the Mosaic law allowing for a bill of divorce. If adultery did indeed dissolve the wedding bond Jesus would have simply said so rather than attack the Mosaic law. Again, there is no such "exception" in Luke.
No it doesn't...Divorce invalidates the marriage...
If adultery did indeed dissolve the wedding bond
Adultery does not dissolve the wedding bond...Divorce does...
As in Luke, if you divorce your wife for (almost) any reason, there is adultery involved...
And then Matthew takes it a step further and tells us that if fornication is involved, there is no adultery attributed to the innocent party...
It's really that simple...But like I said, we are not under the law but under grace...Those verses in Mat, Mark and Luke do not apply to us who are under grace...It is no longer a sin to get divorced, for any reason...
Your religion fails whether it wants to be under the law, or under grace...