John Calvin Commentary Numbers 32:33

"And Moses gave unto them, even to the children of Gad, and to the children of Reuben, and unto the half-tribe of Manasseh the son of Joseph, the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites, and the kingdom of Og king of Bashan, the land, according to the cities thereof with [their] borders, even the cities of the land round about." — Numbers 32:33 (ASV)

And Moses gave to them. We must understand that Moses gave it in such a way that, relying on God’s command, he laid down an inviolable law. For, although it is not expressly stated that God interposed His authority, still His subsequent approval fully assures us of it. So also, although no mention is made of Eleazar and the elders, still it is certain that they were not passed over, but that they were united with him in the decision; especially since the case had been brought before them by the sons of Gad and Reuben (verse 2). There is only an implied contrast between the old covenant which God had made with Abraham, and this new and special privilege, with which He condescended to enrich His people.

At first only the two tribes had been named; half the tribe of Manasseh is now added, since the descendants of Machir, Jair, and Nobah, who were all of the family of Manasseh, had seized upon certain cities and men. The interpretation which some give, as if they²¹⁸ had obtained these victories after Moses had permitted the Reubenites and Gadites to inhabit this side of Jordan, does not seem suitable to me; but rather the reason is given why that portion is excepted which came to the sons of Manasseh, namely, because they were not to be defrauded of the lands which they had separately acquired. Nor is it probable that, when the country beyond Jordan had been given to others, they afterwards made their incursion to appropriate what did not belong to them. The order of the narrative does not make this necessary, for it is common with the Hebrews to transpose the order of occurrences, especially when something previously omitted is incidentally added to give a reason for what is done. If, however, anyone should prefer to believe that they were attracted by the advantage that presented itself, I will not stubbornly argue the point.

But how does it make sense that cities are said to be built which were still standing undestroyed? For we have already seen that the people who had taken them were dwelling in them. I reply that, since it seldom happens that cities are taken without the walls being destroyed, it is not unreasonable that the restoration of these should be called building. It was necessary that the cities should be fortified lest the unarmed multitude²¹⁹ should be exposed to the assaults of every enemy. To this end they repaired what had been thrown down, and thus in a way renewed the cities which were a mass of ruins.

²¹⁸ C. translates the verbs in . translates the verbs in ver. 41 in the pluperfect tense, “Jair, the son of Manasseh, in the pluperfect tense, “Jair, the son of Manasseh, had gone and taken, etc.”gone and taken, etc.”

²¹⁹ “La troupe des femmes et des petits enfans;” the multitude of women and little children. — Fr.