While the way these texts you quote are precise formal-equivalent or word-for-word translations, these types of renditions can cause readers problems if they read them as if they were written using English idiom. This is all that is causing confusion.
For instance, if I were to say: "What is the count of years in your possession?" That is an accurate word-for-word translation of a Spanish phrase. But it might confuse English readers because it follows Spanish idiom. We don't say the phrase this way in English. Instead we say: "How old are you?" Note the vast difference?
Whereas word-for-word Bible translations lend to great study, they often lend little to comprehension for readers, especially those who know little about the idiomatic terms unique to the cultures, eras, and languages of the Scriptures.
In ancient Hebrew culture, prayerful speech attributes all things, good and evil, to God. It is not a literal means of expression, but meant to imply that divine providence can allow evil only for the eventuality that God will deal with it at the proper time. Idioms are forms of speech often hard to fully appreciate outside of understanding the original language, and even by the time Jesus uttered the words of the famous Lord's Prayer, this type of speech was somewhat archaic. Judaism had already begun to stop attributing evil to God in its theology during the Second Temple era, but the liturgical language of prayer still reflected Biblical speech of pre-Babylonian exile which still did that.
"Do not lead us to temptation," actually means "do not let us fall prey to our temptations" or "give us the strength to face our tests successfully." The expression could actually be rendered "spare us from the hour of test" in reference to what some in Judaism called the "Messianic woes," times of testing that would come from the evil one or persecutors expected by some Jews in the Messianic era.
A similar vein is understood in reference to the use of parables by Jesus. Some of the Hebrew Scripture accounts, while apparently based on historical figures, are actually parable-like morality stories that often take great liberties with dramatic license for teaching purposes. The first few chapters of Daniel are such an example as is the entire book of Jonah. When people read these as literal accounts they come to wrong conclusions in the end, like the Watchtower has for 100 years.
Jesus used the same type of teaching genre, offering stories which obviously could not be literal which were designed to make people ask questions of him. For a person to be a disciple in Judaism, they often had to approach a rabbi several times with a question before a direct answer was given them (some in Judaism do something similar today). The teaching technique demonstrates the student's seriousness of resolve to find an answer and the rabbi's desire to teach the disciple how to think for themselves to find right answers.
The parables are the same. If people were not serious about learning from Jesus, they would not inquire and follow him to ask for an explanation. Those that would, Jesus would often act like many rabbis still do, acting surprised that the student didn't understand. It's just a Hebrew teaching technique, like methods used at the college level in universities which are used by professors to weed out true students from those who are just warming seats, so to speak.
The expression about why Jesus speaks in parables that you quote is also a Semitic idiom. It can be rendered: "I teach in parables to teach them that they don't currently look deep enough into things, nor do they listen with deep enough intent, nor do they really use their brain to think." Jesus wanted unity, but not followers who had little more interest than "passing the class," to use a current modern idiom.
