Talmud do Samuela II 9:14

A Gentile came to a Gentile woman and she gave birth. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Gentiles have family relationships¹³³The verse Gen. 2:24: “Therefore, a man abandons his father and his mother and clings to his wife so they will be one flesh” is interpreted to mean that, by the laws of Creation, incest between parents and children, adultery (with a wife not his own) and possibly homosexuality are forbidden. The question is whether a court can enforce the incest prohibition between father and daughter. If there is no recognized legal relationship, that cannot be enforced. R. Joḥanan holds that any court on earth, even a Jewish one, can punish incest between Gentile father and daughter. R. Simeon ben Laqish disagrees.
In the Babli, 62a, the parallel discussion is on a completely different topic, whether the firstborn of a proselyte who converted together with his father is entitled to the customary double portion of the inheritance. R. Joḥanan answers in the affermative, R. Simeon ben Laqish in the negative.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, Gentiles have no family relationships. But is it not written¹³⁴Is. 39:1.: “At that time, Merodakh-Baladan, son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent letters and a gift to Ḥizqiah.” Since he honored his elder¹³⁵Babli Sanhedrin 96a reports that Baladan was incapacitated and Merodakh added his father’s name to his own so that all acts of his regency should also be in his father’s name., he was honored with a family relationship. But is it not written¹³⁶1K. 15:18. The text is contaminated with 2Chr. 16:2.: “At that time, king Asa sent to Ben-Hadad, son of Tabrimon, son of Ḥezayon, king of Damascus, as follows.” Destroyer son of a destroyer. As you say¹³⁷Esth. 9:24. In Targum Šeni 3:1, the family tree of Haman is given up to his ancestor Esaw. It is not clear there whether “Hamedata the Agagite” is intended as a name or a title. In the latter case, Haman’s father’s name was Seraḥ.: “For Haman ben Hamedata was”. Was he the son of Hamedata? That means, oppressor son of an oppressor. So here also, destroyer son of a destroyer. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, so did Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish answer Rebbi Joḥanan, but is there not written¹³⁸2S. 9:10. In v. 2, Ṣiba is called “ ‘ebed of the House of Saul”. Since in v. 9 he is called “esquire of Saul”, it seems that ‘ebed represents the usage of the time the book was finally edited, the later kingdom of Judah, when ‘ebed was the recognized title of officials directly responsible to the king.: “Ṣiba had sixteen sons and twenty slaves.” Do slaves have family relationships¹³⁹Not being able to legally marry, they are empowered to be promiscuous without guilt.? It is to enumerate those who served Mephiboshet together.

A Gentile came to a Gentile woman and she gave birth. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Gentiles have family relationships¹³³The verse Gen. 2:24: “Therefore, a man abandons his father and his mother and clings to his wife so they will be one flesh” is interpreted to mean that, by the laws of Creation, incest between parents and children, adultery (with a wife not his own) and possibly homosexuality are forbidden. The question is whether a court can enforce the incest prohibition between father and daughter. If there is no recognized legal relationship, that cannot be enforced. R. Joḥanan holds that any court on earth, even a Jewish one, can punish incest between Gentile father and daughter. R. Simeon ben Laqish disagrees.
In the Babli, 62a, the parallel discussion is on a completely different topic, whether the firstborn of a proselyte who converted together with his father is entitled to the customary double portion of the inheritance. R. Joḥanan answers in the affermative, R. Simeon ben Laqish in the negative.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, Gentiles have no family relationships. But is it not written¹³⁴Is. 39:1.: “At that time, Merodakh-Baladan, son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent letters and a gift to Ḥizqiah.” Since he honored his elder¹³⁵Babli Sanhedrin 96a reports that Baladan was incapacitated and Merodakh added his father’s name to his own so that all acts of his regency should also be in his father’s name., he was honored with a family relationship. But is it not written¹³⁶1K. 15:18. The text is contaminated with 2Chr. 16:2.: “At that time, king Asa sent to Ben-Hadad, son of Tabrimon, son of Ḥezayon, king of Damascus, as follows.” Destroyer son of a destroyer. As you say¹³⁷Esth. 9:24. In Targum Šeni 3:1, the family tree of Haman is given up to his ancestor Esaw. It is not clear there whether “Hamedata the Agagite” is intended as a name or a title. In the latter case, Haman’s father’s name was Seraḥ.: “For Haman ben Hamedata was”. Was he the son of Hamedata? That means, oppressor son of an oppressor. So here also, destroyer son of a destroyer. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, so did Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish answer Rebbi Joḥanan, but is there not written¹³⁸2S. 9:10. In v. 2, Ṣiba is called “ ‘ebed of the House of Saul”. Since in v. 9 he is called “esquire of Saul”, it seems that ‘ebed represents the usage of the time the book was finally edited, the later kingdom of Judah, when ‘ebed was the recognized title of officials directly responsible to the king.: “Ṣiba had sixteen sons and twenty slaves.” Do slaves have family relationships¹³⁹Not being able to legally marry, they are empowered to be promiscuous without guilt.? It is to enumerate those who served Mephiboshet together.