That is basically why I choose to affirm the London Baptist Confession of 1689. I would be lying if I said it is that it is the only good synopsis of major doctrines of the Bible (Westminster is quite well-developed). However, the balance in the 1689 as well as the substance of it, is what grounds me to be able to admire the complexity and clarity that the 1689 gives.
I do see its faithfulness to biblical standards as a perfect source of conceptualizing and redacting complex and often wordy ideas, but even then the confession points back to Scripture time and time again as its source and essence.
Though there are challenges that even the 1689 can not tend to, it is a good starting point. I would say that even if you don’t affirm the 1689 confession as a description of what your church holds as its affirming confessions, ascribe to one.
What I enjoy about churches who hold such standards is that I can walk into a church and be secure that I will hear the whole council of God. Many independent churches have no accountability to other churches, causing all kinds of craziness; however, the 1689 gives a chance for local independent churches to abide by a standard that keeps all those who affirm it from error.
Here is a link so that you can look through it yourself (LBC 1689), and also my exposition of its contents.