This is a question I am still wondering. Stephen Tong believes there will not be distinction of man and woman:
I'm likely differ from Tong about this. The way I see it, Jesus only mentioned no marriage, but not no gender difference. And gender creation is prior to the fall, so it cannot be a cursed grace (cursed grace = post-fall grace, that I coined myself, is what I consider things that come as a result of the fall and very likely only as the result of the fall, such as various human languages, money, rain, etc., all of which are not likely to continue in the new heaven and earth.)
I can understand why they would differ from me in this, as they would think there is no sex in the after-life. But that's just based on an assumption, if not false one, that when Jesus said there's no marriage, then there will be no sex. At this point, of course, we must thread carefully, for I am not proposing lascivious sexual conducts, human centered orgies, but that which may be mystery beyond us and as more innocent than animal understood it. And unlike the fundamentalists, I do not here prevent myself to think further as if Deu 29:29 applies here, for what God creates, is holy and beautiful and not to be denied. I only allow my creativity be restrain by the precepts of God's word. Deu 29:29 is not such precepts and doing so is actually breaking the precepts of God's word, for it is a twisting of God's meaning.
It's likely that Tong's version of heaven may not be a bodily resurrected ones. The reformed have argued that in the afterlife our bodies are a resurrected bodies, eternal, as our Lord Jesus' resurrected body is as the prototype. Not as spirits in some ethereal realm called heaven like the movies portray it. I would pay attention to if Tong ever mentions this, for I am only assuming here for now. So I'll leave this topic in QUESTIONS category.
In search of masturbation topic, this is as close as I found, this should be an important discussion on sexual desire in general:
Tong claimed that masturbation is not necessarily considered adultery because there is no partner in crime involved. And it is done out with desire to not disobey God and not denying sexual function and with self control to keep oneself holy and abstain from unholy sexual desire.
Second question of the video also questioned about masturbation and pornography.
3rd question is on incest in the First generation. I must insist here now, after hearing so many experts use genetic diversity as the cause against Later prohibition against incest. Yes, that sounds reasonable. But I do protest, that this is not the cause. The prohibition against incest IS THE CAUSE of genetic diversity. I believe this explanation proclaims better God's power and sovereignty. God decides, not nature decides for God. God prohibits, therefore God designed it this way, not nature is this way, therefore God prohibits this according to nature. I have not heard anyone else explains it this way, but I think this is a better answer. But why then is there such prohibition, the enlightenment that I have is so that God may enrich the human family tree with the richness of various relationships: For bosses are not the same as colleagues, mothers are not the same as wives, sisters are not the same as spouses, and so on in an ever expanding community that build and shows God's greatness more and more. Ever roles in relationships are unique when human kind populates, but not before, these roles are not needed. When two partners start a business, they are bosses, one does not need to be a servant and the other a master, until their company expanded, there we have hierarchy of organizational chart. The bigger the company, the more complex the hierarchy, but never confused.