Just a bit about what the difference is in the translations that I pulled together from the internet.
The earliest Greek manuscripts (the originals) over time were used so much that these accepted manuscripts became worn out. Then the Church would copy these manuscripts so they would not lose them. This is why the best manuscripts are not the oldest; because now we have newer copies of the manuscripts that the church always used.
A Bible version is considered only as good as the text from which it is translated. The Alexandrian line of manuscripts are from over 5000 Greek manuscripts in existence, yet only a small handful - less than ten, and among these few are two manuscripts which many scholars value more highly than most other manuscripts. They are called Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and they date a little over 200 years from the original writings. Both these manuscripts are older than the Alexandrian Text from which the KJV was translated.
All Bible translations have their advantages, disadvantages, and criticisms. There are 3 theoretical methods of translating one language into another, and their differences reflect how they choose to approach the historical time difference between the two languages (i.e. words, grammar, phrases, history, culture, etc.). The problem of historical distance can be readily seen in the challenge of translating weights (i.e. talents vs. pounds, etc.), measure (i.e. cubits vs. meters, etc.), money (shekel vs. dollar, etc. [what about inflation?]), and euphemisms (i.e. toilet vs. water closet, etc.)
Methodology--
Formal Literal Method: This method attempts to translate the grammar, language, and style of the original language, called literal or word-for-word translation. There is no attempt to bridge the historical distance between the two languages. Emphasis is on reproducing the modern English equivalent of the ancient words, with tendency to use same word order as the ancient language.
KJV: The King James Version was the only complete Bible available from 1611 to the 1880s. The translation was based on the best available manuscripts at the time. The Textus Receptus remains the primary textual base of this translation. Since then, archeological discoveries of earlier manuscripts and advances in anthropologic and historical understanding of early Semitic history have provided a better basis for the more recent translations of the Bible. This translation is noted principally for its majestic style.
NKJV: The New King James Version was developed by Thomas Nelson Publishers (1982). This is a revised update of the KJV with the changes primarily in vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation to make it more easily readable while maintaining its majestic and lyrical style. The revision, which took 7 years, sought equivalence to the original and was not a new translation.
YLT: The Young's Literal Version was first published in Edinburgh in 1862. Probably the most extreme word-for-word English translations by Robert Young. It claims on its title page to be translated "according to the letter and idiom of the original languages."
Rotherham's Emphasized: The New Testament appeared in 1872. It is even more woodenly literal than Young's translation as another extreme word-for-word English translations.
CLV: The Concordant Literal Version is a word-for-word translation of Greek originally completed in 1926 on the far end of literal equivalence.
ASV: The American Standard Version of 1901 may be classified as mildly concordant, but there is a wide difference between the ASV and Young or Rotherham.
RSV: The Revised Standard Version is probably stands close to the concordant or word-for-word category.
NASB: The New American Standard Bible is less archaic and more theologically conservative, but is so literal that it feels wooden. It is perhaps the most literal modern translation.
Dynamic Equivalence Method: This method attempts to translate the grammar, words, and style of the original language into the equivalent of the other, called functional or thought for thought translation. But it maintains the historical distance of historical facts and objects. The principle of closest equivalence is designed to avoid awkward literalness on the one hand and unjustified interpretations on the other. The method employs idiomatic equivalence when necessary and word-for-word translation when possible. Emphasis on reproducing the functional meaning of the ancient words with freedom to rearrange the order of the words (syntax) in the target language.
GNB: The Good News Bible was formerly known as Today's English Version (TEV), but in 2001 was renamed the Good News Translation because of misconceptions that it was merely a paraphrase and not a genuine translation. The focus is strongly on ease of understanding, poetry is sometimes sacrificed for clarity.
CEV: The Contemporary English Version translation simplifies Biblical terminology into more everyday words and phrases. It often paraphrases in order to make the underlying point of a passage clear, rather than directly translating the wording.
NLT: The New Living Translation is a functional equivalent translation. The translators have gone to great lengths to convey the thoughts of the writers, and it is therefore highly interpretive by the translators.
Dynamic and formal combination:
NIV: The New International Version contains elements of word-for-word and thought-for-thought translation. It is probably the most popular translation today.
TNIV: a new version on the heritage of the NIV created as a balanced mediating version, one that would fall in-between the most literal translation and the most free; word-for-word and thought-for-thought.
NET: The New English Translation attempts to be the most accurate, the most readable, and elegant at the same time
Free (Paraphrase) Method: This method attempts to translate the ideas of the original language into another. Emphasis is on expressing the meaning in contemporary language, with numerous additional words. The translator restates the "gist" of the text in his own words and is usually done by a single translator.
The Living Bible: a paraphrase of American Standard Version (1901).
The Message: a paraphrase Bible from original languages that uses a lot of English figures-of-speech.
More technical differences between versions are caused by the translators using different families or groups of Greek manuscripts as their primary source. For instance, differences can be seen in comparisons with the New International Version (NIV) and the King James Version (KJV) of the passage 1 John 5:7-8 and their treatment of the ending of the Gospel of Mark. Variation can be anywhere from extra words in a verse, to the actual meaning of the verse being changed. There is no translation that is 100% literal, so using serveral translation will allow you to consider the strengths and weaknesses of each. With all the info we have from Ray we can use most Bibles to get to the truth.
mercy, peace and love
Kat