If you don't know that it has been sacrificed to idols, then it is okay,
1 Corinthians 10:

> 
> 25Eat whatever is sold in the meat market **without raising any question** on the ground of conscience.
> 
> 
> 

Don't ask. Just eat.

> 
> 26For “the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.” 27If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you **without raising any question** on the ground of conscience.
> 
> 
> 

Again, don't ask.

> 
> 28But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then **do not eat it**, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience—
> 
> 
> 

If you know that it has been sacrificed to idols, then don't eat it in front of them.

> 
> 29I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else’s conscience? 30If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?
> 
> 
> 

What if you know that it has been sacrificed to idols and no one else is around, is it okay to eat?
['https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/81217', 'https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com', 'https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/35953/']
**First,** this section of scripture first appeared nearly 2,000 years ago, and was written to Christians who were surrounded by pagans who had a practice of presenting (offering) meat to their idols before taking it to the market to be sold as food. Therefore, when you ask, "Should ***we*** eat food sacrificed to idols?" you have jumped nearly 2,000 years to this day and age, I presume. I take it that you are asking Christians in the Year of our Lord 2023 whether to eat food sacrificed to idols, or not.

**Second**, where I live, I have no awareness of any food being presented before idols prior to being made available to anyone to buy. If you know of such practices, it would be helpful to either state a case (as an example of the pertinence of this question today) or to give a list of modern-day countries where this happens.

**Third,** ***the simple answer to your question*** (irrespective of any time from the middle of the first century A.D. until today) ***is "No, Christians should not."*** The matter is known to God, even if no other human knows you have eaten food that had been offered before an idol. ***Once you know, you are culpable, and God knows.*** Christians are to do everything (including their eating and drinking) for the glory of God. But, as the passage shows, there's no need to first hold an inquisition about it, asking questions, ferreting out individuals who might be suspected of the pagan practice and checking if a particular piece of food had been handled by them.

That section of scripture, however, has more to say on the matter than just that bit about food presented before an idol. It speaks of not eating meat that has not first been bled. But you do not ask about that, so I will end my answer here.
Underlying the OP question is an issue of reconciling the attitude of Acts (and Revelation) with that of Paul. Acts and Revelation forbid eating food offered to idols. For Paul, the pagan deities are not real, and their idols have no power. So he says:

> 
> As to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that an idol has
> no real existence and that there is no God but one... We are no
> worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. (1 Cor. 8:4,7)
> 
> 
> 

But Acts is quite clear that for Christians, abstaining from such for is a requirement:

> 
> For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no
> greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from
> what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is
> strangled and from unchastity. If you keep yourselves from these, you
> will do well. (Acts 15:28-29)
> 
> 
> 

And the Book of Revelation condemns eating such foods in no uncertain terms:

> 
> You tolerate the woman Jez′ebel, who
> calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and beguiling my servants
> to practice immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. (Rev. 2:20)
> 
> 
> 

Paul's solution to the problem was although no food is forbidden, a person should also respect the sensitivities of believers who think the pagan deities have real power. So he says:

> 
> Only take care lest this liberty of yours somehow become a stumbling
> block to the weak. For if any one sees you, a man of knowledge, at
> table in an idol’s temple, might he not be encouraged, if his
> conscience is weak, to 'eat food offered to idols?' And so by your
> knowledge this weak man is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ
> died. Thus, sinning against your brethren and wounding their
> conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if food
> is a cause of my brother’s falling, I will never eat meat, lest I
> cause my brother to fall. (1 Cor. 8:9-13)
> 
> 
> 

[![Photo of a Buddhist service with food on a table along with a statue of Buddha](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cruQS.jpg "Photo of a Buddhist service with food on a table along with a statue of Buddha")](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cruQS.jpg "Photo of a Buddhist service with food on a table along with a statue of Buddha")

In the first century, Christians had to decide whether to follow the letter of the rule given in Acts or to accept Paul's teaching that since idols have no power, we are free to eat foods offered to idols unless a fellow Christian's faith is threatened by such a thing. Today, the issue is generally moot. But when a fellow believer might be offended if I were to eat food offered to Krishna or Buddha, I need to decide whether it is a greater sin to turn down the food my host presents or to, in Paul's words, "tempt" fellow Christian to eat a supposedly forbidden food and thereby compromise his faith.