But there’s a flaw in this. Because he’s the boy who LIVED. Not the boy who LIVES. If he was the boy who LIVES, I would say you are on to something. But he LIVED. Implying that he conquered death once before in the past. Not that he will eternally conquer death. It’s not like King Arthur where he is the once and future king. That implies eternity. Lived does not.
See now, the way I thought the book could have/should have ended was more practical. There were three Deathly Hallows. And it’s said that whoever possesses the three Deathly Hallows is said to be a “master of death.” Harry was the possessor of all three of the Deathly Hallows. He had the invisibility cloak, the resurrection stone and the elder wand. By possessing all three, he mastered death and so he could not be killed. And THAT should have been the reason why Voldy’s spell backfired. Because Harry couldn’t die. And THAT should have been the reason why Harry places the elder wand back with Dumbledore. Because Harry wouldn’t want to be a master of death. And because wanting to live eternally was Voldy’s downfall. And it was always Harry’s CHOICES that made him different from Voldy, more than anything else.