In this paper, we re-examine the connection between formal argumentation and logic programming from the perspective of semantics. We note that one particular translation from logic programs to instantiated argumentation (the one described by Wu, Caminada and Gabbay) can serve as a basis for describing various equivalences between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics. In particular, we are able to provide a formal connection between regular semantics for logic programming and preferred semantics for formal argumentation. We also show that there exist logic programming semantics (L-stable semantics) that cannot be captured by any abstract argumentation semantics.