Well, on one hand he seems to be arguing that there can never be legitimate prophecy, because a revelation of what persons will eventually freely do would violate the person’s free will somehow. 
But on the other hand, he may end with technical universalism anyway, since he claims that the Persons of the Trinity will never give up “their dream” that we would all come to experience fully the trinitarian life together.
CBK is clearly emphatic about that, but then I notice he’s emphatic about what he rather vaguely calls “their dream”.
So I guess it depends on what he means by “their dream”. If he means the Persons never give up acting toward fulfilling Their intention to save all sinners from sin, then that would be technical universalism (even if it happened that there was a neverending standoff).
But if he means that the Persons will never give up wishing they could have saved any persons who end up somehow permanently lost, then that would only be a maximally hopeful Arminianism at best: eventually God may stop acting to save some sinners from sin (although He’ll always sadly dream about having achieved something better, if so).
Based on some of his comments regarding the Trinity such as in his preceding journal entry here I would suppose he means the former. But then he could stand to be rather stronger about that. I may leave a comment. 
(CBK is the author of The Shack Revisited, which will be released tomorrow, Oct 2.)