(Image source: Wikimedia Commons)

BY CHRISTINA HARTMAN

Could it be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ?

Observers have debated the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin for decades -- but a team of Italian scientists are now saying it couldn’t have been faked. (Video via History Channel)

First -- some background from NBC, which in 2008 looked at conflicting beliefs surrounding the shroud.

“To believers it bears the miraculous image of Christ, crucified. But tests done in 1988 show it wasn’t that old. Radiocarbon dating of the cloth concluded it was created in the 14th Century, making it a medieval hoax.”

Believers say the carbon dating done in the ‘80s was contaminated -- but skeptics have called it proof the cloth and its markings were forged by medieval tricksters.

But The Daily Mail reports, this new Italian research suggests the technology that would have been needed to create the marks on the shroud -- simply wasn’t available in medieval times.

“They have concluded only something akin to ultraviolet lasers – far beyond the capability of medieval forgers – could have created them. This has led to fresh suggestions that the imprint was indeed created by a huge burst of energy accompanying the Resurrection of Christ.”

But here’s the thing -- you might have seen a few headlines suggesting the researchers took a side in the actual debate about whether the Shroud of Turin was Christ’s burial cloth.

But no, the point of the research was just to determine whether the shroud’s markings could have been faked. And the scientists stopped short of offering a non-scientific conclusion. The Independent notes...

“...in case there was any doubt about the preternatural degree of energy needed to make such distinct marks, the ... report spells it out: ‘This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date.’”

So essentially, believers and skeptics remain in the same camps. The Telegraph’s Tom Chivers writes, this new research still doesn’t answer a lot of questions.  

“It's a fascinating and mysterious object, but it says nothing about the questions of whether Christ was a historical figure, whether He was the Son of God, or whether He rose from the dead.”

As to what an observer might take away from the findings, the team’s lead researcher says he’ll leave that quote “to each person’s own conscience.”