I think that the 'kenosis' of Phil. 2 helps clarify that Jesus' exaltation is a return to a glory formerly held. This makes the exaltation as Lord and Savior an addition to that glory rather than a brand new glory. And the purpose of that addition is given in the same verse, "in order to grant repentance and forgiveness of sins to Israel."

Prior to coming in flesh, God could not grant repentance and forgiveness ... all he could do, through the sacrificial system, was overlook sins committed in ignorance. The Christ left glory to be born as Savior. He then effected salvation and, as proof, resurrected from the dead and ascended in a redeemed body.

The redeemed body that he returned to glory with is an addition He did not begin with and this is the sense in which He has been made Lord and Christ. Not that the Son of God has ever been less than God but that He emptied himself to become a son of man in order to save man. This unique in all creation Emmanuel is now exalted once more.

@Mr.Bond In some sense, when Jesus is born he's the savior - yes, but only because he will then be exalted. The saving occurs when he's exalted.

OTG Again no! He was the Savior/Redeemer before He was born. This is according to Genesis 3:15, "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed. He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise hm on the heel." Who do you think this is? To make matters worse for you there's Isaiah 43:11, "I, even I, am the Lord; And there is no savior besides Me." Reconcile this with Luke 2:11 and Isaiah 44:6?

@Mr.Bond Re Gen. 3:15, "I will." ? I refer to Isaiah in the original post. In Isaiah, God also says He alone is God. Yet Moses is God in Ex. The first point in the original post is that BUs posit an agent/author distinction. It is core to their hermeneutic, and there a large scriptural basis for doing so.