Mel Gibson has returned to public discussion not through a film premiere or a red carpet appearance but through a wide ranging conversation about faith history and one of the most debated religious artifacts in the world the Shroud of Turin.

During a recent appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast the veteran actor and director spoke at length about Christianity the resurrection of Jesus and new interpretations of the mysterious linen cloth that many believe once wrapped the body of Christ.

His remarks have stirred renewed debate among believers skeptics and historians while drawing attention back to a relic that has challenged science and theology for more than a century.

Gibson career spans more than four decades and includes some of the most recognizable titles in modern cinema.

Born in New York in 1956 as the sixth of eleven children he moved with his family to Australia during the Vietnam era.

There he studied drama at the National Institute of Dramatic Art in Sydney and developed his early reputation on the stage before gaining international fame through the Mad Max series.

Hollywood success followed with the Lethal Weapon films and later with his transition into directing.

His most controversial and influential project remains The Passion of the Christ released in 2004.

The film depicted the final hours of Jesus with an intensity and realism rarely attempted in mainstream cinema.

While it achieved enormous commercial success and became one of the highest grossing religious films in history it also provoked strong criticism for its graphic violence and accusations of anti Jewish bias.

Gibson personal controversies during that period further complicated public reaction to the film and led to a temporary retreat from the spotlight.

In recent years Gibson has slowly returned to directing and acting with projects such as Hacksaw Ridge and Father Stu.

He has also spoken more openly about his Christian faith and his belief that cinema can serve as a tool for spiritual reflection.

This perspective shaped much of his discussion with Rogan where he addressed both his upcoming plans for a sequel to The Passion of the Christ and his views on historical evidence surrounding Jesus.

The conversation turned toward the Shroud of Turin when Gibson described it as one of the most significant physical objects connected to the life of Christ.

The shroud is a long linen cloth bearing the faint image of a man who appears to have suffered scourging crucifixion and a crown of thorns.

For centuries it has been kept by the Catholic Church and displayed only on rare occasions.

Many Christians believe it is the burial cloth mentioned in the Gospels while skeptics argue that it is a medieval creation.

Interest in the shroud intensified in 1898 when photographer Secondo Pia took the first photographs of the cloth.

When he developed the negatives he discovered that the image appeared as a photographic positive revealing a detailed figure with wounds matching those described in biblical accounts of the crucifixion.

This unexpected discovery transformed the shroud from a devotional relic into a scientific mystery.

Since then researchers from multiple disciplines have examined the cloth.

In the 1970s the Shroud of Turin Research Project conducted extensive physical and chemical tests and concluded that the image was not painted and could not be explained by conventional artistic techniques.

They noted the absence of pigments brush strokes or binders and suggested that the image might have formed through an unknown process involving energy or radiation.

In 1988 carbon fourteen dating tests performed by laboratories in Oxford Zurich and Arizona concluded that the cloth dated from the Middle Ages rather than the first century.

These results led many institutions to declare the shroud a forgery.

However critics later argued that the samples were taken from a section of the cloth repaired after a medieval fire and therefore contaminated.

Subsequent studies have questioned the reliability of the original dating and suggested that the cloth may be older than first reported.

Gibson told Rogan that recent reevaluations of the data have reopened the debate.

He claimed that some scientists involved in the early testing later expressed doubts about the conclusions and acknowledged inconsistencies in the methodology.

According to Gibson the image on the cloth remains unexplained by modern physics and chemistry and no reproduction has fully matched its properties.

He also pointed to anatomical details on the shroud that align closely with descriptions of Roman crucifixion practices.

The wounds on the wrists rather than the palms the marks of a scourge consistent with Roman whips and the pattern of blood flow all suggest a victim subjected to historical execution methods.

Gibson emphasized that pollen grains found on the cloth correspond to plants native to the Middle East and that the weave matches textiles used in the ancient Mediterranean.

One of the more striking claims discussed during the podcast involved faint circular shapes near the eyes of the figure which some researchers interpret as impressions of coins placed on the eyelids of the dead.

These coins appear to bear markings associated with the reign of Emperor Tiberius.

If accurate this detail would place the cloth firmly within the time period described in the New Testament.

Gibson argued that the shroud offers not only historical evidence but also theological insight.

He suggested that the image may have formed at the moment of the resurrection through a burst of energy powerful enough to imprint the body onto the fabric.

While acknowledging that such a phenomenon cannot be measured or reproduced he described it as consistent with a supernatural event beyond ordinary explanation.

The discussion has prompted renewed interest among audiences who had not followed the shroud debate closely.

Some skeptics maintain that the cloth is a sophisticated medieval artifact possibly created using early photographic or chemical techniques.

Others note that no written record of the shroud appears before the fourteenth century and that the church itself has never officially declared it authentic.

Religious scholars caution against treating any artifact as definitive proof of faith.

They emphasize that Christian belief rests primarily on scripture tradition and personal conviction rather than physical evidence.

Yet many acknowledge that the shroud remains one of the most studied and enigmatic relics in history.

Gibson own faith journey has been marked by conflict controversy and renewal.

His career suffered serious damage after highly publicized arrests and offensive remarks in the mid two thousands.

Over time he sought rehabilitation through counseling public apologies and a return to professional discipline.

In interviews he has spoken about relying on prayer and repentance during that period and viewing his later successes as a form of redemption.

The planned sequel to The Passion of the Christ tentatively titled The Resurrection aims to explore events following the crucifixion including the appearances of Jesus to his disciples and the early spread of Christianity.

Gibson has said that the project will require innovative storytelling techniques to depict spiritual experiences that transcend ordinary narrative structure.

Production has faced delays but remains in development.

Reaction to Gibson comments has been mixed.

Supporters praise his willingness to address faith openly in an industry often reluctant to engage religious themes.

Critics argue that he presents speculation as evidence and risks misleading audiences about the state of scientific consensus.

Historians stress that while new analyses continue to emerge none have definitively overturned the medieval dating results.

Nevertheless the renewed attention has brought the Shroud of Turin back into public conversation at a time when interest in ancient texts relics and archaeological discoveries is growing.

Advances in imaging spectroscopy and material analysis may yet provide new insights into the cloth origin.

Some researchers hope that future testing under stricter controls could clarify lingering questions about contamination repair and sample selection.

For believers the shroud serves as a visual meditation on suffering sacrifice and resurrection.

For scientists it represents a puzzle that challenges conventional understanding of image formation and textile preservation.

For historians it offers a case study in how faith tradition and material culture intersect across centuries.

Gibson influence ensures that the debate will continue beyond academic circles.

As a filmmaker he has demonstrated the power of narrative to shape spiritual imagination.

His endorsement of the shroud does not settle the controversy but it amplifies its significance for a new generation.

Whether the cloth proves to be a relic from the time of Jesus or an extraordinary creation from the Middle Ages its impact is undeniable.

It has inspired devotion skepticism art and scientific inquiry on a global scale.

In speaking about it Gibson joins a long line of thinkers who have grappled with the boundary between history and belief.

The Shroud of Turin may never yield a final answer that satisfies all sides.

Yet its enduring mystery continues to invite reflection on the events at the heart of Christianity.

Through his recent remarks Mel Gibson has once again positioned himself at the intersection of faith art and controversy reminding audiences that some questions remain powerful precisely because they resist easy resolution.