I've seen two seemingly very different approaches to defining connections on a smooth $G$-torsor $\alpha:A\to B$, with seemingly different intuitions.
A complement of the "vertical bundle" satisfying an equivariance condition.
Smooth functors $\mathcal P_1(B)\to G$-$\mathsf{Tor}$ from the path groupoid to the category of $G$-torsors, intuitively sending a point to its fiber and a thin-homotopy class to the isomorphism of fibers it induces. (This functor needs to be locally trivial and smooth in a suitable sense.)
The second approach seems closer to general fiber bundles, but more troublesome technically. The first approach is very elegant but seems to "care" about smoothness more explicitly.
How are these approaches related? In general, how does one move between lifts of paths and complements of the vertical bundle? Why do Hurewicz connections deserve to be called connections?
Let $\pi \colon P \rightarrow M$ be a principal $G$-bundle.
A Hurewicz connection abstracts and generalizes the first approach to the topological setting. Namely, if $s$ is a Hurewicz connection which provides us with uniquely defined lifts, we can define "parallel transport" by $P_{\alpha,0,t}(\sigma) := s(\sigma, \alpha)(t)$. This parallel transport depends continuously on $\alpha$ and $\sigma$ and that's about it. It doesn't have to provide us with a homeomorphism between the fibers along $\alpha$, it is not necessarily invariant under reparametrizations, etc.