Propensity Modeling, still use Test/Train Split?
You are right; you shouldn't predict on the same data you have used for training your model. If your goal is to only output probabilities and you don't mind achieving this by having not a single classifier but a number of them, you can potentially use nested cross-validation to achieve that.

In the outer cross-validation steps, you break your data in $N_{out}$ folds, where one fold is kept for testing the model and the remaining $N_{out} - 1$ folds are used to train. You then feed this training dataset (which is similar, in nature, to that 70% you have mentioned in OP) to the inner cross-validation step with $N_{in}$ folds. Here, you will compare different models and choose the best performing one. This chosen model is then passed to the outer fold (see above) and can be used to obtain probabilities for the 1 fold that was left out. You then repeat the same procedure for other folds in the outer fold. At the end of this nested cross-validation process, you will have probabilities for all your rows (but they will have come from $N_{out}$ different classifiers, each corresponding to one of the outer folds).

Note that the ultimate purpose of nested cross-validation is not to do this but it will give you what you want as a by-product.