Your statement assumes Abraham was justified multiple times in the same forensic sense before God, but Paul’s grammar and argumentation do not support that conclusion.
In Romans 4, Paul deliberately returns to Genesis 15:6 as the defining moment of Abraham’s justification:
“Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.”
The repeated use of λογίζομαι (logizomai - “credited,” “reckoned,” “imputed”) throughout Romans 4 is forensic and accounting language, describing a completed legal reckoning of righteousness apart from works. Paul further strengthens this by contrasting faith and works in Romans 4:4–5, where justification is explicitly said to be “to the one who does not work but believes.” Grammatically, Paul’s use of δικαιόω (dikaioō) is declarative, not progressive, and nowhere suggests Abraham was repeatedly re-justified through later acts of obedience.
Moreover, Paul intentionally argues that Abraham was justified before circumcision (Romans 4:9–11), proving that justification was not tied to covenantal acts, obedience, or subsequent demonstrations of faith, but to faith alone apart from works.
When James later refers to Abraham offering Isaac, he is not redefining Paul’s doctrine of justification, but speaking of the vindication or outward demonstration of genuine faith. Abraham’s obedience in Genesis 22 manifested the reality of the faith already accounted as righteousness in Genesis 15.
So the issue is not that Abraham was justified multiple times salvifically, but that Scripture discusses the same patriarch from different perspectives: Paul addressing forensic justification before God, and James addressing the evidential nature of living faith before men. Confusing those contexts ignores both the grammar and the flow of Paul’s argument in Romans and Galatians.
J.