"Receive the license" is the same as the granting of the right. It's the state verification that is the real sticking point. The ATF takes the position against me (i.e., the one you are concerned about), but I'm pretty sure it has never been litigated.
Here's my explanation: I don't think it can seriously be argued that TN's reciprocity with GA constitutes TN "issuing" you a license. TN is giving you a right you would not otherwise have. That's what a license is. I know it's counterintuitive and somewhat conflicting with the shorthand of referring to the plastic card in your pocket as a "license," but all that really is is evidence or documentation of a license. A license is, in technical parlance, an intangible. It's existence is evidenced by something that also is called a "license."
So the only question is whether TN verified that you are eligible for a license. The 11th Circuit has said that the state's law is the only one that matters when making that determination. That means if TN has determined, under TN law, that you are eligible for the license you have (the intangible reciprocal license), then you should be okay. Under TN law, you are eligible if you have a GWL. That may sound circular, but the GFSZ Act is not well written. And ambiguities in criminal law have to be construed against the government.
The bottom line is that millions of people commit this felony every day, under the ATF's interpretation. The federal government tends to reserve its prosecutorial power to those who have other issues (e.g., felon in possession). Otherwise, they could hire every lawyer in the country as assistant U.S. Attorneys and keep every district court busy for years prosecuting everyone.