I'm not entirely sure how to go about proving this so hopefully someone can point me in the right direction. The definition I have for a limit point is "$a$ will be a limit point if for a sequence $x_n$ there exists a subsequence $(x_{n_k})$ such that $\lim_{k\to\infty} (x_{n_k})=a$".
In the forward direction if $x_n$ converges to a value $a$ then every convergent subsequence of $x_n$ must also converge to $a$. I'm not entirely sure where else to go from here. Intuitively I know that what I'm trying to prove must be true since if $x_n$ converges to $x$ then there exists an $N\in\mathbb{N}$ such that $\forall n\geq N$ we have infinitely many terms satisfying $\forall \varepsilon >0\Rightarrow x-\varepsilon<x_n$ which implies that $x$ is a limit point. I'm not entirely sure how to rule out a second limit point. Would it be sufficient to show that if $a$ and $b$ are limits of a convergent sequence $x_n$ then $a$ must equal $b$?
In the backwards direction if $x_n$ is bounded and has only one limit point then we know that there exists only one point $x$ such that we can find infinitely many terms satisfying $\forall \varepsilon >0$ $\left | x_n-x\right |<\varepsilon$ which implies that $x_n$ converges to $x$.
I'm quite concerned I am proving this incorrectly since I don't think I am using any facts about subsequences although they are mentioned directly in the definition for a limit point.