Well, I've seen you call a guy with Ace high and no kicker and he showed down QJ and you had the best hand and played for stacks.
So my thinking behind the 2 lines (i.e. fist-pump checkraise the turn or lead the turn and call his shove) would be based on my assumption that you think villian is making a move on you with position and/or a hand that is behind you but could outdraw you (i.e. KQ or AJ type holdings)
In regards to your friend liking to 3-bet because it folds out bluffs and semi-bluffs, do you want to fold the guy there? Perhaps the semi-bluffs because they could get you. But you want him to overplay a weaker Ace without a spade or that whiffs against your hand for stacks I would think.
I like the 3-bet because it forces Villian to let us know if we're playing for stacks, rather than our flying blind into the turn.
If Villian has a vulnerable flush and fears you could outdraw him, he may drop the hammer on the flop after you 3-bet. If Villian has a set he will probably also drop the hammer. If Villian has a complete bluff he may give it up rather than committing his entire stack on the play.
If Villian is on a semi-bluff, he may be willing to get it in with a pair and flush draw.
So essentially I'm thinking that by 3-betting the flop there are a lot more hands that Villian could be bluffing us with that we fold out (rather than flyin blind into the turn) and only a few hands we're ahead of but that could outdraw us (i.e. the semibluffs) that we might fold the best hand to.
I think the 3-bet on the flop gives us a bit more information and keeps us from having to make a lot of difficult decisions on later streets when we're OOP.
If we 3-bet and Villian just cold calls, good grief!