 There are a great many examples throughout the Bible, but the bottom line is that Christianity has never had a problem with downplaying ideas even though they exist in scripture.  In fact, the books called Maccabees are a part of Catholic bibles but don’t exist in Protestant ones.  Also, the book Song of Songs is a part of the Bible, but it is definitely not championed in Christian teaching.  The great reduction of future Christianity might go as far as to circulate and use abridged New Testaments.  There is already a popular printing that has everything Jesus said in red letters with everything else in black letters.  And, many of us have been handed small pocket New Testaments that come with the books of Psalms and Proverbs—but where did the rest of the Old Testament go?  Receiving one of these Bibles is like being taught that the only necessary parts of the Old Testament are Psalms and Proverbs.  It will be conceivable to find, in the future, usage of a New Testament that has been reduced to only the four gospels and selected excerpts from the other books.
       In the future, Christianity will show a desire to purge the contradictions between much of established teaching, and Jesus’ teachings.  This movement will also seek to eliminate contradictions between theologies created in history and added into Christianity from simply Jesus’ own belief system.  Even though this great reduction in beliefs will include the decentralization of Jesus’ body dying as crucial to humanity, as he himself never taught principles surrounding that event, there is one important aspect of Jesus that will not be touched in the future.  His nature, whether only divine, only human, or both divine and human, will be left to the individual believer.  Even the Council of Chalcedon (451 C.E.) that made official his nature as 100 % divine and 100 % human left some minds something to struggle with.  There are no definitive declarations by Jesus himself establishing who or what he was.  He may very well have been confessing to be divine, but then again he may never have confessed it.  In the synoptic gospels he is elusive about it.  Arguments can be made regarding some of his statements in the book of John, but even he himself explained (such as in Mark) that he spoke frequently in symbolic, not literal terms, so that we can’t ascribe definitive literal meaning to those statements. The various parables are a classic example of his method of speaking figuratively.
       In fact, a metaphorical understanding of Jesus’ words throughout the gospels will be part of the approach that future Christianity will use in promoting the original doctrine above the Paul-Augustine model and above the additions of Calvin, Darby and others.  It is an awareness that Jesus’ new message, as well as his interpretation of the Judaic tradition of his own lifetime, is a separate religion from what developed in Christianity later, that will finally compel Christians of the future to return to the source. 