Firstly, if you may have never heard or considered it, here is why Yahshua could inherit the throne of David through Mary and not by many mental gymnastics of proving his geneaology through adoption:
Numbers 27:8 And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.
It is possible and logically probable that Mary was an only child.
Many believe Mary's geneaology is found in Luke and Joseph's is in Matthew and that the Messiah could be considered a descendant of David by adoption and people go to lengths to prove this. However, I I found this to be interesting.
Read this commentary:
Numbers 27:8 And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.
It is possible and logically probable that Mary was an only child.
Many believe Mary's geneaology is found in Luke and Joseph's is in Matthew and that the Messiah could be considered a descendant of David by adoption and people go to lengths to prove this. However, I I found this to be interesting.
Read this commentary:
Rabbi Moshe Yoseph said:Matthew 1:16 And Yaakov begat Yoseph the husband of Miryam, of whom was born יהושׁע, who is called ha Moshiach.
The Aramaic term gowra is mistranslated as "husband" in all Greek manuscripts. Gowra in proper context is a guardian or legal guardian or legal caretaker, as seen in the Torah in Deuteronomy 25:5-6 where Yisraelites are given the command to establish a gowra or legal guardian. Most likely this Joseph took Mary's deceased father's place and became her gawra as Boaz did in Ruth 2:20, where he is called the gowra for Ruth in the Aramaic Targum. (Boaz was Ruth's gowra before he ever became her husband.) This Joseph (in verse 16) was Mary's legal guardian.
In verse 19, however, the Aramaic/Hebrew word is baalah that can only mean "husband". The Aramaic Peshitta clearly uses the two different words (gowra and baalah) to show that one Joseph (in verse 19) was Mary's husband. With this clarification, we see that there are indeed 14 generations from Babylonian captivity to Yahshua's birth (in accordance with Matthew's bold insistence in verse 17 that there are three sets of 14 generations), versus only 13 if the two Joseph's were to be accounted as one and the same. If we count Joseph the gowra/legal guardian as #12, Mary as #13 and Yahshua as #14, we have a perfect set of 14. Therefore this geneaology is clearly Miryam's geneaology and not Joseph's. In order to be the Moshiach, Yahshua had to inherit the throne from Solomon - not Nathan as Christianity teaches. Nathan never sat on the throne, and David's many prophecies indicate that the lineage of the Moshiach would be through Solomon alone and never through another one of his sons.
Therefore Luke's account does not give Mary's geneaology, whereas Matthew's account does give Mary's geneaology, as he counts Mary as number 13 in the final set of 14, thereby allowing verse 17 to make perfect sense. One can pick this up only in the Aramaic Peshitta text, which not only is the primacy text from which all Greek translations have come, but also is the only one which differentiates between gowra and baalah.