But then Harry couldn't kill Voldemort. Go back to the prophecy, one must die at the hand of the other, not that they must kill each other. (And I didn't go for that talk that "the other" actually refered to a third person.)
I wouldn't have been happy if Dumbledore had actually been raising Harry to be a lamb to be led to the slaughter. But, apparently, he acted similar to another Lamb that I could think of, but won't mention in case the Fundamentalists are reading this thread. ;-)
Voldemort could have been killed himself right after he killed Harry. That would have been a quite cool way for him to go. And with keeping with the story.
“I wouldn’t have been happy if Dumbledore had actually been raising Harry to be a lamb to be led to the slaughter. But, apparently, he acted similar to another Lamb that I could think of, but won’t mention in case the Fundamentalists are reading this thread. ;-)”
Dumbledore has pointed out again and again that one has free will. Harry could have easily made the choice to run and hide, and Dumbledore pointed out that he had that right. What made the sacrifice so powerful, is that Harry chose to die.. Which makes him alot like another Lamb.
My theory.... But actually, there were three involved: Harry, the Harry/Voldemort Horcrux, and Voldemort.
One Voldemort (the horcrux) died at the hands of the other Voldemort. And neither Voldemort could live while "the other" (Harry) survived.
Rowling said she'd gone to a great deal of effort to properly word the prophecy -- it'd be interesting to see her explain why.