An alternative way of looking at the accepted answer, and justifying the steps more (to answer the questions its comments), is considering the columns as vectors (which I now notice @Semiclassical did in their comment), $$\mathbf{a} = \begin{bmatrix}
a_1 \\
a_2 \\
a_3
\end{bmatrix}$$
and same for $\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{c}$. Now we should know determinants are "multilinear", so for any further vectors $\mathbf{v}, \mathbf{w}, \mathbf{z}$ and any scalar $x$, $$\mathrm{det}\bigl( (\mathbf{v}+\mathbf{w}), \mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) = \mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) +\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{w}, \mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) \\
\mathrm{det}\bigl(\mathbf{v}, (\mathbf{w}+\mathbf{z}), \mathbf{c}\bigr) = \mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{w}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) +\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) \\
\mathrm{det}\bigl( x\,\mathbf{v}, \mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) = x.\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}\bigr)\\
\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{v}, x\,\mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) = x.\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) $$
Knowing this, we know (e.g., from $\mathbf{v}=\mathbf{w}+(\mathbf{v}-\mathbf{w})$ on above) also $$\mathrm{det} \bigl( \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{w}, \mathbf{c} \bigr) = -\mathrm{det} \bigl( \mathbf{w}, \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{c} \bigr)\\
\mathrm{det} \bigl( \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{c} \bigr) = 0$$
This suffices to straightforwardly work out the equality (I'm doing the first matrix column on the first line, then the second column of both on second line):
$$\require{cancel}\mathrm{det}\bigl( (\mathbf{a}+x\,\mathbf{b}), (x\,\mathbf{a}+\mathbf{b}), \mathbf{c}\bigr) \\
= \mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{a}, (x\,\mathbf{a}+\mathbf{b}), \mathbf{c}\bigr) + x.\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{b}, (x\,\mathbf{a}+\mathbf{b}), \mathbf{c}\bigr)\\
= x.\cancel{\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{c}\bigr)} +\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) + x.\Bigl(x.\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{c}\bigr)+\cancel{\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}\bigr)}\Bigr)\\
= \mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) + x^2.\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{c}\bigr)\\
= \mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) - x^2.\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}\bigr) = (1- x^2).\mathrm{det}\bigl( \mathbf{a}, \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{c}\bigr)\\$$
The advantage I feel of this notation/approach is that you can see it extends to higher dimensions (adding columns $\mathbf{d}$, $\mathbf{e}$, ... ) without onerous notation. Also, you could replace in the above each "det(...)" by "$f$(...)", so it holds for any multilinear function $f$.
Compared to the highest-scoring answer: That answer is more elegant, but was found by working backwards from the solution, I feel (but it works equally well in each dimension), and needs a bit more skill in matrices.