How do we judge a society and its identity as Muslim or from the pre-Islamic age of ignorance?

The questioner : You heard the speech... that took place.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : You heard the speech... that took place.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : Regarding... the identity that the society holds, it was said that one party judges that the ruler and the society are disbelievers, and then there is a group that judges that the ruler, of course, has committed apostasy and that the society's identity is that of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance. So I want you to clarify to me the opinion you hold regarding the identity of the society.

The Shaykh: I said.

The questioner : I was not...

Another questioner : It was not.

The Shaykh : Was it not present?

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Ah, we judge by the apparent, and the apparent... regarding the society, we judge it to be Muslim as we observe and see prayer and fasting and so on, and so forth. But without a doubt, the society consists of individuals who are not of Islam in any way, and in this society, among the Muslims themselves, there are deeds and ideas that contradict Islam. However, the status of these ideas and these deeds among these Muslims has not reached the point where they are judged to be among the disbelievers. The insistence of some writers or some associations or parties today on labeling such a society as a society of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance is, in my opinion, a great excess; especially when they interpret the meaning of the word "Jahili" (of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance). Otherwise, in "Sahih al-Bukhari," it is reported that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was informed about Abu Dharr that he had insulted a slave he owned by his mother, so he sent for him and asked him; so he admitted to it, and he said: .

Another questioner : .

The Shaykh; so the fact that a person is not free from the presence of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance in him does not mean that he is classified as being of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance, but rather it is usually attributed to him. So we are still under the domination of the disbelievers here and in Syria and many of the Islamic countries, yet the people are still Muslim, ; so if the ruler is a disbeliever, as we agreed with the professor, I don't know, of course, you were here... when we assumed that the ruler... that a disbeliever dominated these lands, did the lands become non-Islamic?! No, my opinion is that we judge by the apparent, and these lands are still Islamic despite the domination of the disbeliever, despite the deviation of many individuals, such as tabarruj (a woman's display of her adornment), cinemas, and so on, but the name of Islam still applies to them; legally speaking.
Now, to label this society as "Jahili" (of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance) is an expansion of this term without religious evidence, and the term itself, we found that the Messenger (peace be upon him) used it, and he only intended by it...