If God wants to protect an aggressor against my use of force, he can do it.

I have frequently heard this defense from non-pacifists. If someone comes into their home, they'll kill them because it's their right to self-defense. And if God wants that aggressor to come to Christ, God is able to protect the attacker from harm if he really wants. 

The funny thing about this line of reasoning is that if God is able to protect the attacker, isn't he able to protect the defender? Why should a defender be so willing to take another's life, to do violence to another human being? Why are we ok with trusting another person's life to God, but not our own? The question should not at all be "what is God capable of doing." Of course God can protect whomever he wants. The question is "what means has God prescribed for us to use." The pacifism argument shouldn't turn into an argument about God's sovereignty. I fully believe that God is sovereign, more fully than most, as I am in the Reformed camp. The issue is rather about God's commands. My job is not to determine the path I believe to bring me the better chance of survival and allow God to override tweak the outcome if he wants. My job is to figure out what path leads to obedience and allow God to determine the outcome he desires, which may be the message my decision sends and the soul it touches rather than than the life it fails to preserve.