The explanations we find in religious story and in science/philosophy share a common structure: both attempt to "explain" a diversity of events and observable entities in the world by pointing to a simpler, more unified, underlying ground of explanation, -- i.e., the source or "cause" of an event or thing.
This common structure is an indication that philosophy/science did not appear de novo -- but emerged from a given cultural and mythic way of understanding the world.
Religious story and philosophy/science differ, however, in the kind of underlying unity they appeal to. Briefly:
religious story ultimately appeals to the "super-natural" -- what lies beyond (or underneath) the natural, observable world:
philosophy/science appeal to what may be known by way of observation and argument.
They further differ insofar as religious story or myth may not be "interested" in "explaining" the same sorts of things accounted for in philosophy/science. For example, much religious story has to do with articulating and justifying certain values: much of early philosophy/science -- and, by its methodology, modern science -- is interested in a material order which is kept distinct from questions of value.