In heaven, I take it literally that the lion will lay down with the lamb. But that is not to say that it is a sin to kill an animal for food or other suitable reason (protecting livestock, crops, skins, etc.)
But Paul also talks about food saying something like “What comes out of a man’s mouth is more important than what goes into it.”
And IIRC the meat he was talking about was meat that had been sacrificed to the various gods, and then sold on the street afterwards. But that it was okay to eat it.
Cecil was not killed for food or a warm jacket. Cecil was killed for a trophy. That’s what got me upset.
As for interpreting Paul, it can also be argued that he meant meat in general (not only meat specifically offered to idols). I cannot prove it either way, however.
Let’s wait for a vegetarian Bible expert (since I am neither). I only wanted to object to some rich American paying $50,000 to kill a lion halfway around the world to make a trophy of him. I find that objectionable, vegetarianism notwithstanding. IMHO. I cannot ‘prove’ my objection any more than that. It is not impossible for a generally conservative person to have some feelings, especially for living creatures being killed ... and without the reason or ‘excuse’ of it being for necessary food. Any dentist who can pay $50,000 for a lion-killing-guide can pay $5 for a bite to eat at his local diner.