I assume the term "witnessing" has been used by religious liberals for awhile and I've just missed it.
I've seen it several times recently and it kind of bugs me.
This kind of gets to the heart of one of my issues with the language of reverence debate. (Yes, that again.)
Part of the argument for a language of reverence is that people know what religious terminology means and it resonates with them. This is true.
My response to this is that people do know, for example, what "getting saved," for example, means. But I have a really negative impression of it. I don't want to "get saved." If a close friend announced that he/she had "gotten saved," I have to say I would worry about them. The resonance I have with the term isn't positive.
This brings me to "witnessing."
There wasn't a whole lot of conservative Christianity in Northern Virginia when I was a kid, so nobody really witnessed to me until I went to college. There I got witnessed aplenty.
After awhile, I learned to say "I've seen on Law and Order that you can't be both a witness and a judge. So you can tell me about your beliefs, but you can't decide if they are right for me."
Anyway, I guess my point is, I get the concept of adopting a term, changing its connotation and making it our own.
But why is this a term we want to use?