In Genesis 15 verse 2, Abram lamented the fact that he had no natural son to inherit his estate, and it would fall to his chief servant Eliezar. This passage shows how all the rights and rank of a house can be transferred to a non-blood relative. Also, we read in Genesis chapter 48 that Israel adopted Joseph’s two sons, Ephriam and Manassah. They were now to be considered equal with Joseph’s brothers in inheriting the promises given to Israel and each of them were entitled to an equal portion of the land.
So your question is irrevelant
Highly relevent, and you are wrong. I understand your need to look for such loopholes, but the fact is that biblically, the right of lineal privilege (kingship and priesthood) is exclusively passed on through the male line. If you can provide a counterexample, please let me know.
I neglected to point out in my last post that Luke gives Joseph's genealogy, not, as some have tried to claim, Mary's genealogy.
Being from David through Nathan would also disqualify Jesus, since the line must go from David through Solomon. Matthew's genealogy does go through Solomon. But Matthew also shows the lineage passing through the cursed King Jeconiah.
All of this is completely apart from the obvious fact that Jesus never did sit on the throne of David.