In his magisterial “Search for the Christian Doctrine of God,” Richard Hanson said that Athanasius “cannot really explain why Christ should have died.” However, many scholars have pointed out Athanasius’ robust atonement theology. Following them, this paper aims to explore Athanasius’ doctrine of the atonement in “On the Incarnation,” thereby suggesting a new lens through which profitable insights might be gained. Namely, social-scientific criticism can yield new insights for patristic studies just as it has for biblical studies. In this paper, I will explore how values of honor & shame impacted Athanasius’ understanding of the atonement. Athanasius portrays humanity’s fall as a dishonoring of God’s creative order, resulting in corruption and death. In this context, the Incarnation and Christ’s sacrificial death restore divine honor while simultaneously addressing human shame. Jesus “is dishonored for our sake, that we might be honored.” By assuming human nature, Christ redeems humanity from corruption and reestablishes the proper relationship between Creator and creation. This dual restoration—of honor to God and humanity—forms the foundation of Athanasius’ implicit atonement doctrine.